Ihsa To Consider `The Selvie Rule`

Johnny Selvie has grabbed his last rebound for King, but he may leave a legacy that extends beyond the Class AA state championship hardware he helped put in the school`s trophy case.

That legacy may be a new Illinois High School Association bylaw prohibiting participation in athletic competition by anyone under criminal indictment. Selvie played in all 32 of King`s games this season even though he had earlier been arrested twice on drug charges. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges, which include accusations he sold a controlled substance to an undercover officer.

King officials kept him on the team, answering the resulting spate of criticism with a reminder that one is innocent until proved guilty. The critics didn`t buy that argument, and one of them, Galesburg Principal John Browning, did something about it.

In a Jan. 18 letter to the IHSA, Browning proposed that students involved in interscholastic activities be ``suspended or restricted from participation for gross violations of reasonable standards of behavior outside of the school.``

The proposal will be put in amendment form and considered in the fall by the IHSA`s Legislative Commission. If okayed there, it must gain majority approval in a vote of IHSA member schools.

Thus, we could have ``the Johnny Selvie rule.`` For although Browning says he mentioned no one by name in the letter, he adds that one can ``draw your own conclusions`` as to what prompted his action.

Browning says that nothing in the IHSA bylaws cover off-the-field behavior, leaving such matters to the individual schools. Some have codes of conduct regarding such matters and those even less serious; others don`t. For schools that don`t, Browning wants the IHSA to be able to step in.

``The whole reason the IHSA exists,`` he said, ``is to have fair competition, not everyone setting up their own rules. To give consistency throughout the organization. If some schools impose standards, I think they all should.``

He has support from state Sen. Carl Hawkinson (R-Galesburg), who will watch the fate of Browning`s proposal with interest. Hawkinson says it is premature to discuss whether he would introduce legislation along the lines of that proposal until he studies the IHSA`s response.

The main objection to such an amendment will be that it judges an athlete before the courts have. In the Selvie case, for instance, a trial date still hasn`t been set. Browning, though, says his proposal does not presume guilt. Hawkinson emphasizes that any bylaw must provide for a hearing before an eligibility ruling is made.

``There ought to be due process, but due process does not have to be the same as in a criminal court,`` he said. ``The mere accusation shouldn`t be enough, but the bottom line in terms of offenses such as drugs is our schools are taking a lead role to discourage use. We`re saying it won`t be permitted, then turn around and say we have no power as a body.

``I`m not so concerned with the competitive effect or of the team`s succeeding. I`m more concerned with the image we are sending other students and the public as to whether we are serious about attacking serious crime.``

The IHSA will have to put Browning`s proposal in a form where it is sufficiently specific and ensures consistent and fair hearings. The more important duty falls to the Legislative Commission and membership-deciding whether the association should be getting into this at all or leaving it up to each school.

If an amendment is adopted, expect it to be tested in court about as quickly as it is used. Can it be upheld? Martin Greenberg, associate director of Marquette University`s National Sports Law Institute, says good-conduct codes of private organizations are usually allowed if they are related to the organization`s purpose and provide for due process. He says a distinction can be made between presumptions of innocence in the criminal justice system and the eligibility rules of a private association.

One key issue, Greenberg says, is whether the courts deem high school athletics a right or a privilege. If it is a right, that brings in

constitutional questions; if it is a privilege, one is likely going to be bound by the rules of the organization.

The courts so far have tended to rule high school athletics a privilege, but that wouldn`t rule out court challenges. In the case of a bona fide college prospect such as Selvie, for instance, a lawyer could argue that banning him from competition violated his right to equal protection under the law by taking away his chance for a college scholarship.

Because so many athletes are willing to take such a route and because the courts dispose of cases so slowly, Greenberg warns that an IHSA amendment wouldn`t serve much of a purpose, at least when it comes to seniors.

``The lawyer asks the courts to step in with an injunction. The court grants it. The kid plays out the season in most instances. Then the court sets a hearing sometime in the future. In this case, the team and kid win because he gets to play, and it ultimately results in a decision in the future when no one gives a darn.``